Australia A vs India

[eddiesmith]

Bloody Sydney

 

[eth-dog]

Maddison has huge defficiencies and is mentally fragile at international level!

I would pick a guy who is not necessarily dominating shield cricket, but someone who you think could go to another level if challenged. I think labuschagne is a prime example of that.

Are you seriously judging his "mental fragility" off his first stint in the test side?

Newsflash: He was averaging mid 20's that Shield season and was in no way ready to be a test cricket player. After 1300-odd runs at above 80 over 2 seasons I think he's ready.

 

[eddiesmith]

I'm not ignoring it, I'm expanding on it to say he saw a role that was vulnerable in the test team, expanded his game to that role and was successful.



So far that hasn't been the case (although you're right, if Burns plays that's most likely going to be the case) but you shouldn't set batting orders for poor batters much like you shouldn't set fields for poor bowling. So far Marnus has been able to come in off the back of at least a few overs if not the best part of a session last summer.

I believe given a few games yes, he'd be fine, he is good enough. But I don't believe in redefining a performing player's role to keep someone else in the side because his spot is being usurped by someone who is a future prospect. Especially when Marnus hasn't opened in red ball cricket in quite some time.

Either way I will concede: Wade would be stiff to miss.

But the problem Australia faces is if they pick their best 6 available batsmen, then they’ve got 1 opener in Harris and 5 middle order batsmen.

Wade or Green missing out whilst Burns or Marsh plays would not be picking the best team.

Labs has previously said he was open to stepping up to replace Davey so it really comes down to Labs with experience even if it was a while ago, Wade with only limited overs opening experience or a batsman averaging 5 this season.

 

[Hamez]

Green subbed out of the game with concussion.

 

[Tippett2Goal]

So apparently you've passed your fitness test RohitSharma and are on the way to Aus

 

[Bungeye]

Are you seriously judging his "mental fragility" off his first stint in the test side?

Newsflash: He was averaging mid 20's that Shield season and was in no way ready to be a test cricket player. After 1300-odd runs at above 80 over 2 seasons I think he's ready.

Dominating shield cricket doesn't mean anything when you're batting on roads and their is a man and his dog in attendance!

I've seen enough in the short form of the game to know he is mentally fragile!

 

[Great8]

Pick a specialist opener.
Whiteman is next in line IMO so I’d rather see him play.
Burns will play though IMO

 

[Kapow!!!]

But the problem Australia faces is if they pick their best 6 available batsmen, then they’ve got 1 opener in Harris and 5 middle order batsmen.

Wade or Green missing out whilst Burns or Marsh plays would not be picking the best team.

Labs has previously said he was open to stepping up to replace Davey so it really comes down to Labs with experience even if it was a while ago, Wade with only limited overs opening experience or a batsman averaging 5 this season.

Yeah I wouldn't be opening with Wade either, it does sound like a backwards step. For me I don't mind either Marsh or Maddison: Both would be serviceable options and definitely better than Burns. But I see your point, picking purely 6 best batters it would be 1 opener and 5 middle-order batters. My argument remains it's a false economy to the overall balance and run scoring ability. Happy to agree to disagree on this one, we'll probably go on and on with this one and I respect your passion.

I really hope Green comes up but there's a chance this could be a moot point sadly

 

[BACCS]

Just open with Harris and Wade/Marsh, with the view of Warner/Puck by the end of the series.

Burns doesn’t deserve his spot, it’s pretty clear.

Has Pucovski been formally ruled out of the first Test yet?

 

[Ok Boomer]

In - Khawaja

 

[Millky95]

Harris and Maddison I think is the go. You can't pick Burns on form imo. Green is out so Wade will stay at 6

 

[Caesar]

Also, are you really accusing me of choosing facts to fit a narrative when you're the one conflating Labuschagne's ability to open now, after years of development, based on statistics from the 4 times he opened in 2015/2016 in the sheffield shield?

All I did was point out that Labuschagne has historically had no problem opening the batting when called upon to do so.

Why you want to ignore that fact, I am not sure.

 

[eddiesmith]

Yeah I wouldn't be opening with Wade either, it does sound like a backwards step. For me I don't mind either Marsh or Maddison: Both would be serviceable options and definitely better than Burns. But I see your point, picking purely 6 best batters it would be 1 opener and 5 middle-order batters. My argument remains it's a false economy to the overall balance and run scoring ability. Happy to agree to disagree on this one, we'll probably go on and on with this one and I respect your passion.

I really hope Green comes up but there's a chance this could be a moot point sadly

We can have much more reasonable discussions these days

But yeah I suspect now they’ll take the cautious approach with Green. Harris should be in now as even a 20-30 is better than the alternative is offering

Comes down to Burns, Maddinson or Marsh for final spot and Starc or Pattinson for bowlers

 

[Belnakor]

Another globe for burns. Couldn’t possibly pick him.

 

[Kapow!!!]

All I did was point out that Labuschagne has historically had no problem opening the batting when called upon to do so.

Why you want to ignore that fact, I am not sure.

I've already agreed to disagree on this one, but I can't let it go that no, I haven't ignored it: I've countered it with context rather than raw data. You've been disingenuously ignoring my argument that effect of not opening since early 2016 could/would have an affect on his ability to perform from ball 1 at Test level in that role (and then added a thinly veiled ad hominem inferring motives on my argument). Either that or you've just outright dismissed it as a non-factor, either way I maintain it's in pretty bad faith.

But yes, if we are to look at it purley in a vacuum: He has opened before. If we were playing International Cricket Captain then that would be all we'd need to make that decision.

 

[Kapow!!!]

We can have much more reasonable discussions these days

Haha yep, remember the days of Haurtiz vs White over who should be the spinner after Warne retired? That really was the wild west of this board

But yeah I suspect now they’ll take the cautious approach with Green. Harris should be in now as even a 20-30 is better than the alternative is offering

Comes down to Burns, Maddinson or Marsh for final spot and Starc or Pattinson for bowlers

Somehow I think one way or another everyone is going to be disappointed with at least one decision made by the selectors for the first test. Starc over Pattinson, Burns being held onto for...reasons(?),Nobody being too upset if Marsh gets selected. Someone is going to be sad

 

[eddiesmith]

So is there any chance of play tonight or even the rest of the game?

 

[Cleavy]

Typical rubbish NSW weather.

 

[danielnajdek]

And they take pot shots at Melbournes weather

 

[eddiesmith]

And they take pot shots at Melbournes weather

Cue lpno1 with we need the rain and it’s only a meaningless game

 

[Caesar]

not opening since early 2016 could/would have an affect on his ability to perform from ball 1 at Test level in that role

It’s possible. It’s also possible he’s been zapped by space rays from Mars. You have the same amount of evidence for both.

All we can really say is that when Labuschagne has previously been called upon to open at first class level, he has had no great problem with the task.

But of course, that truth is somewhat inconvenient for your narrative.

 

[Kapow!!!]

It’s possible. It’s also possible he’s been zapped by space rays from Mars. You have the same amount of evidence for both.

Interesting escalation...

All we can really say is that when Labuschagne has previously been called upon to open at first class level, he has had no great problem with the task.

Ah, outright dismissal it is. We're just glossing over the context of how long ago that was or how much development has gone into his game outside of this role or any impact this could have on his game. So no actual discussion, just "I've scored as an opener in my past therefore I am one". At least eddie acknowledges it could be a factor but is worth the risk as he's good enough to find his feet (i.e. spoken as someone who recognises the mental side of the game and, more importantly, done so in good faith).

But of course, that truth is somewhat inconvenient for your narrative.

Yeah this one's going nowhere. I guess I could return the ad hominem serve but it's not worth it. There's a clear incongruence in how we see cricket played here.

 

[eddiesmith]

Go from club cricketer carrying the drinks to now playing as concussion substitute!

 

[Kapow!!!]

Cue lpno1 with we need the rain and it’s only a meaningless game

Well that's just sacrilege...

 

[Santana]

Hell of a catch to get Maddinson